Canadian Sea King crashes off Denmark

[Armymatters]

Easy, there Captain Sensitive.  I meant junk the things and get you guys some new kit that doesn't break.  By all means, pull it out of the water and find out that the duct tape holding the patch onto the replaced whatzahoozits came loose.  But by pulling it out, I would hate that to mean that it was going to be fixed and put back in service. 
Is the problem not simply they are old and need to be replaced?  I don't use them, so I don't presume to know anything about them.  I just read about them when they go splash or crunch.

I think we can all agree that the Sea Kings, although excellent airplanes in the past, are now more than overdue for replacement. The ageing airframes, although well designed, are nearing the end of their service lives. Unlike armoured vehicles, which you can continuously refurbish, or ships, which can stay afloat almost indefinitely with a little maintenance, airplanes have set life spans, and once they hit the end of their life spans, they start falling apart, and become unflyable, eventually.

 

[WannaBeFlyer]

I think we can all agree that the Sea Kings, although excellent airplanes in the past, are now more than overdue for replacement.

Definitely.

Glad to hear the crew was allright.

 

[3rd Herd]

Moved to proper thread

 

[zipperhead_cop]

I think that was my fault and armymatters got left in the wind.  I made a comment about Leo's and how beat up they were as a comparison about the Sea Kings, and it got a bit hijack-ish.  We got bumped to our own thread in armour for discussion on the Leo (not my intent) and I will check over there to see how bad it is getting flamed by the real armoured guys. 
If a mod wanted to just disappear it...you wouldn't hurt my feelings
I was however, curious as to how many maintenance hours a Sea King incurs as a ratio to hours in the air.

 

[Good2Golf]

Not true, Duey.  We got a 25K series gearbox to go with the -100 engines.  IMHO, we have a pretty solid drivetrain/powerplant combo going on right now.  We have just let the spare parts situation and sensors/avionics slide for so many years, we are hopeless behind the power curve.

The Sea King is/was a brilliant design leap in helicopters.  Alot of the stuff old Igor Sikorsky did in designing it (with a slide ruler, mostly) has never been bettered in 40 since.  It is a class act as a helicopter and will always be my favorite.  But alas, ours are old and getting tired.  Time to jump two full generations of technology in one single bound!

And I have never heard a serving Sea King crewmember refer to the aircraft as a "flying coffin".  The reporter is talking out of his @$$.

Cheers,

-1 for me...

SKT, did the series 25 MGB come at the same time as the -100's?  My last discussion of the engine/MGB combo, I must admit, was dated...I was talking with Stinger 25's Nav many moons ago...and he was intimately familiar with the -8's flexshaft as you'll recall.  I was under the impression at the time that you guys only got the -100....not a tranny upgrade -- I stand corrected on the issue.  I suppose what I was hoisting aboard were pilots' comments that the engine input quills of the MGB were not rated to the 103% emerg rating of the individual -100 engine and thus, the crew was not able to employ Max Conting/Emerg engine power under OEI conditions.  Update to memory banks completed.

Cheers,
Duey

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Duey,
The only answer that I can give you is... that it depends.  All of our Sea Kings are upgraded to T58-100 engines/25K gearboxes now.  This happened between 2000 and about 2003, I think.  I was on the Det that took the first fully upgraded aircraft to the Gulf in '00.  As we were receiving upgraded engines and gearboxes at different rates, we had (for awhile) a situation there were aircraft on the line with a variety of combinations of engines and gearboxes.

I don't recognize your reference to the Flex shaft on Stinger 25.  PM me if you want to give me more details.  Perhaps my tiny memory will be jogged!

As for issue of OEI conditions, what I'm guessing you mean (correct me if I'm wrong) is that we must detune our engines to perform OEI training, in order to avoid overtorquing the MGB by accident.  That only applies in training.  As you are well aware, AOI limits only apply if you feel the aircraft might have another flight left in it.  If you are in such a position where another flight seems unlikely, pull as much torque as you need to stay alive.

 

[Good2Golf]

SKT, no PM necessary, public records...I was thinking more back to the summer of '94, after Stinger 25 crashed outside St-John on 28 Apr 1994 (RIP Majs Wally Sweetman and Bob Henderson  ) on its way to HS 443 lines in Pat Bay.  The nav and FE survived, nav was at 443 ops when I and others flew in support of the Victoria Commonwealth games.  The nav (sorry, can't remember his name) was mentioning at the time that the -100's were on their way to the fleet, but he hadn't mentioned the gearboxes.  As an aside, while my squadron was out in Victoria, I had to conduct a test flight after replacing two of three main flight hydraulic actuators...I took the Twin for a scoot around the block with all the maint crew techs with me (about 6 or 7).  The 443 techs stared in disbelief as our techs happily climbed on board for the test flight with me.  I don't blame the 443 techs, I think the investigation into 425's crash was still going on...  Perhaps the MGB upgrades came later...not sure, but I'll hoist aboard what you're saying SKT about the -100 and new tranny's. 

Hey, wanna have a side bet who flies their respective new machines first?  (Cyclone or TALC?)

Cheers,
Duey

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Hey, wanna have a side bet who flies their respective new machines first?  (Cyclone or TALC?)

No.

 

[trucker00]

I might have missed it, does anyone know who was on the chopper?  I have a friend who flies Sea Kings out of Sherwater, not sure what ship he's on right now.

 

[Inch]

Easy, there Captain Sensitive.  I meant junk the things and get you guys some new kit that doesn't break.  By all means, pull it out of the water and find out that the duct tape holding the patch onto the replaced whatzahoozits came loose.  But by pulling it out, I would hate that to mean that it was going to be fixed and put back in service. 
Is the problem not simply they are old and need to be replaced?  I don't use them, so I don't presume to know anything about them.  I just read about them when they go splash or crunch.

No problem amigo, I was a little quick on the gun there.

The problem is that the systems are older than I am, example, our heater doesn't use bleed air like most turbine aircraft, it uses JP-8 and it's its own little engine sort of thing that burns the fuel and pumps the heat into the cabin on two settings, hot and really hot.

I thought it was great that we've got new engines, until I talked to an S-61 maintainer in Ottawa this past weekend who scratched his head and said "You mean -110 engines?" because he didn't know anyone still used -100's.

So yes, they're old, the systems on them are old and they need to be replaced to make us way more useful for whatever role we end up doing in the future.

As for hours of maint to hours flown, that's a number the media likes to fling around. I have no idea how much maint time is required per hour flown. It's not like we go flying for an hour and then shut 'er down for 30 hours of maint. I took a Sea King to Ottawa on a cross country trainer this past week, we flew a little over 17 hrs flight time and the only maint we did on it was a scheduled inspection that took about 3 hours to do plus our daily preflight and post flight checks. Keep in mind that 30hrs of maint per 1 hr of flight is man hours, ie 5 techs working for 6 hours = 30 hrs of maint. Included in the maint totals are our preflight inspections which take maybe 10 min, but there's 3 of us doing them so there's 30 min of maint right there.

whatzahoozits is a common term, the correct term is doey-do or chummy.  ;D

I might have missed it, does anyone know who was on the chopper?  I have a friend who flies Sea Kings out of Sherwater, not sure what ship he's on right now.

Names have not been released to the media yet, PM me the name and I'll let you know if he was on it.

 

[Devlin]

Well now, aren't we living that right now, eh? 

Too true Too true 8)

 

[zipperhead_cop]

whatzahoozits is a common term, the correct term is doey-do or chummy.  ;D

Roj--Air lingo dictionary updated accordingly

 

[ChopperHead]

would do-hickeys and thinga-ma-gigs also make that list?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

would do-hickeys and thinga-ma-gigs also make that list?

No.  The supplier closed his factory in 1997, so we were forced to replace them all.  I haven't seen one of those in an aircraft since... 2001? 

 

[Pearson]

Strange question from left field.....
They still make Sea Kings yes?
They have been constantly updated...yes?

Why not just buy new Sea Kings?

What do i know .. just an ex-grunt asking a question.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Sikorsky stopped making Sea Kings- late 1970's (or so)

Westland stopped making license-built Sea Kings in the late 1980s.

There is no one who makes Sea Kings today.

The whole trouble is that we have not been constantly updating our Sea Kings.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Maybe we should have the plans sent to Bombardier for a two year feasibility study--$4.8 million
Put together a purchasing committee for a year--$750,000
Approve a purchasing agreement with Bombardier--$450 million with 45 million penalty clause
And then...


You know it's coming....



Wait for it.......



CANCEL THE CONTRACT. Hahahahahaha!  It's brilliant!  And it helps the economy (well, at least Quebec's economy). 
And they already have the experience with that, so it should go off without a hitch. 

Then get 15 more years out of the Sea Kings. :blotto:

 

[Pearson]

Sikorsky stopped making Sea Kings- late 1970's (or so)

Westland stopped making license-built Sea Kings in the late 1980s.

There is no one who makes Sea Kings today.

The whole trouble is that we have not been constantly updating our Sea Kings.

Thanks fo rthe information.... referring to the Sea King in general being upgraded, not ours.
As i said, thought from an ex-grunt..
now back to your regularly scheduled thread

 

[M Feetham]

Hi all,
I too am glad the flight crew got out safe, well done to the boats crew. I just recently left the Athabaskan, posted out in July 05, and have sailed on 280's for five years. As a ships diver I have closed up many times with the rescue watch for emergency flying stations. Usually it is a chip detect light or low pressure alarm or someone in the cockpit smells fuel. I have heard a myriad of reasons for the aircraft to call a pan and have to land. I have also seen the helicopters fly for up to three weeks and have nary a problem. Well done to the maintainers. As far as recovering the Aircraft, most likely one of the two Fleet Diving Units, with support from another country, US or UK will be tasked with the recovery mission. Once again glad the Aircrew is alive and well, god speed to all those on Athab. Big hi to any sailors/nciops on the site.
Take care all.
Marc

 

[Inch]

http://www.airforce.forces.ca/news/2006/02/grfx/IMG_0079.jpg

For all the lookie-loos, here's what's left of her.

As the media pointed out, it's blades are gone, like they're really going to stay on there when they impact the water while still spinning.  : I am surprised the tail stayed attached, usually a helo will "ball up" when it crashes due to the torque on the tail rotor drive shafts.