[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Exceptional Chinook driving (Page 1 of 2)
|
There is another video out there somewhere, from a different angle. Does the same thing, lands on the back wheels, rolls forward, then backwards. Then he takes off, still going backwards. Gets airborne again, then noses down and hauls ass!!! Not exactly the vid I was looking for, but same thing.  |
|
The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies.
<~~~~~ Hook FEI :) Oh and yes, your uncle heard that if its not leaking oil it because it ran out,, HAHAHHA, its so ugly the ground repels it, HAHAH, and no we can't fly with just one rotor head working. But yes its the fast Army helicopter in level flight, we can turn faster than any rotorcraft the military owns and I can pick up a HH-60 that an Air Force pilot crashed in a brownout crash taking off from gravel (female pilot, if that makes a difference, wink wink) and carry it faster than the slick UH-60's in the formation behind us can fly. |
|
Quoted: The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies. <~~~~~ Hook FEI Back in the early '70s 'shithook' was a term of endearment. No offense intended. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies. <~~~~~ Hook FEI Back in the early '70s 'shithook' was a term of endearment. No offense intended. I'm just teasin 
|
|
Check this one out. Those rotors can't be more than 10' away from the rock wall in the last half of the video.
chinook |
|
FYI...
http://www.chinookcrews.com/ Two motors... Two rotors... Skids are for kids... D co. Wagonmasters 6th ACCB. |
|
Quoted: The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies. <~~~~~ Hook FEI :) Oh and yes, your uncle heard that if its not leaking oil it because it ran out,, HAHAHHA, its so ugly the ground repels it, HAHAH, and no we can't fly with just one rotor head working. But yes its the fast Army helicopter in level flight, we can turn faster than any rotorcraft the military owns and I can pick up a HH-60 that an Air Force pilot crashed in a brownout crash taking off from gravel (female pilot, if that makes a difference, wink wink) and carry it faster than the slick UH-60's in the formation behind us can fly. However, as a former Airframe mech, your bird is the biggest PAIN IN THE ASS to work on of anything still in active service.... Too much 'creative' sheet-metal work, too many fab-from-stock parts.... Too little composite... So yes, I still call 'em shithooks... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies. <~~~~~ Hook FEI :) Oh and yes, your uncle heard that if its not leaking oil it because it ran out,, HAHAHHA, its so ugly the ground repels it, HAHAH, and no we can't fly with just one rotor head working. But yes its the fast Army helicopter in level flight, we can turn faster than any rotorcraft the military owns and I can pick up a HH-60 that an Air Force pilot crashed in a brownout crash taking off from gravel (female pilot, if that makes a difference, wink wink) and carry it faster than the slick UH-60's in the formation behind us can fly. However, as a former Airframe mech, your bird is the biggest PAIN IN THE ASS to work on of anything still in active service.... Too much 'creative' sheet-metal work, too many fab-from-stock parts.... Too little composite... So yes, I still call 'em shithooks... LoL! Every f-cking part needs to be trimmed to size! |
|
Quoted: No offense to your beloved shithooks, they are great birds. That female pilot is a great stick, I've flown with her quite a few times. Show me a helo that isn't vulnerable to brownouts. I won't even list the long laundry list of helicopters we've crashed in brownout conditions in OIF/OEF. At least pave hawks aren't scared to fly in daylight, unlike your RPG magnets. The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies. <~~~~~ Hook FEI :) Oh and yes, your uncle heard that if its not leaking oil it because it ran out,, HAHAHHA, its so ugly the ground repels it, HAHAH, and no we can't fly with just one rotor head working. But yes its the fast Army helicopter in level flight, we can turn faster than any rotorcraft the military owns and I can pick up a HH-60 that an Air Force pilot crashed in a brownout crash taking off from gravel (female pilot, if that makes a difference, wink wink) and carry it faster than the slick UH-60's in the formation behind us can fly.  |
|
Quoted:
Check this one out. Those rotors can't be more than 10' away from the rock wall in the last half of the video. chinook   That is crazy!
|
|
Quoted: How do they keep the front and rear rotors from striking each other? During some of those maneuvers, the front rotor was tilted so far forward that the rear portion was ABOVE the front part of the rear rotor! They inter-mesh. Think eggbeater. They are directly coupled via the driveshaft (unless a droop stop fails and the rotors cut into the fuselage and sever it, anyway). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
How do they keep the front and rear rotors from striking each other? During some of those maneuvers, the front rotor was tilted so far forward that the rear portion was ABOVE the front part of the rear rotor! They inter-mesh. Think eggbeater. They are directly coupled via the driveshaft (unless a droop stop fails and the rotors cut into the fuselage and sever it, anyway). That would be the only way that makes sense. So, the two engines in the rear drive both rotors. That would lead one to believe one of two things: 1. The aircraft is underpowered, or 2. The aircraft is well powered but beats the hell out of the airframe by driving all that HP through a driveshaft and secondary transmission. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How do they keep the front and rear rotors from striking each other? During some of those maneuvers, the front rotor was tilted so far forward that the rear portion was ABOVE the front part of the rear rotor! They inter-mesh. Think eggbeater. They are directly coupled via the driveshaft (unless a droop stop fails and the rotors cut into the fuselage and sever it, anyway). That would be the only way that makes sense. So, the two engines in the rear drive both rotors. That would lead one to believe one of two things: 1. The aircraft is underpowered, or 2. The aircraft is well powered but beats the hell out of the airframe by driving all that HP through a driveshaft and secondary transmission. It's more #2 (they have more than enough power, especially newer variants). They don't beat the airframe up too badly because of the contra-rotating inter-meshing rotor system. All the torque is "seen" by the airframe in the same direction all the time, so it can be mitigated to some extent by the design. It can encounter problems with ground resonance, most three bladed (or multiples thereof) helicopters are subject to them. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How do they keep the front and rear rotors from striking each other? During some of those maneuvers, the front rotor was tilted so far forward that the rear portion was ABOVE the front part of the rear rotor! They inter-mesh. Think eggbeater. They are directly coupled via the driveshaft (unless a droop stop fails and the rotors cut into the fuselage and sever it, anyway). That would be the only way that makes sense. So, the two engines in the rear drive both rotors. That would lead one to believe one of two things: 1. The aircraft is underpowered, or 2. The aircraft is well powered but beats the hell out of the airframe by driving all that HP through a driveshaft and secondary transmission. Multiple transmissions, and a lightweight aluminum drive shaft... This way if one engine gets hit, the aircraft has some chance of survival (either engine can power the whole mess).... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Check this one out. Those rotors can't be more than 10' away from the rock wall in the last half of the video. chinook That is crazy!Balls of steel, that pilot. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The next person to call it a Shit Hook gets to walk home after 2 weeks in indian country. And I'm not risking my life getting shot at for grandma's 6 week old brownies. <~~~~~ Hook FEI :) Oh and yes, your uncle heard that if its not leaking oil it because it ran out,, HAHAHHA, its so ugly the ground repels it, HAHAH, and no we can't fly with just one rotor head working. But yes its the fast Army helicopter in level flight, we can turn faster than any rotorcraft the military owns and I can pick up a HH-60 that an Air Force pilot crashed in a brownout crash taking off from gravel (female pilot, if that makes a difference, wink wink) and carry it faster than the slick UH-60's in the formation behind us can fly. However, as a former Airframe mech, your bird is the biggest PAIN IN THE ASS to work on of anything still in active service.... Too much 'creative' sheet-metal work, too many fab-from-stock parts.... Too little composite... So yes, I still call 'em shithooks... I prefer to work on a Chinook as an aircraft electrician/avionics. Plenty of room for the most part and easy to work on. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How do they keep the front and rear rotors from striking each other? During some of those maneuvers, the front rotor was tilted so far forward that the rear portion was ABOVE the front part of the rear rotor! They inter-mesh. Think eggbeater. They are directly coupled via the driveshaft (unless a droop stop fails and the rotors cut into the fuselage and sever it, anyway). That would be the only way that makes sense. So, the two engines in the rear drive both rotors. That would lead one to believe one of two things: 1. The aircraft is underpowered, or 2. The aircraft is well powered but beats the hell out of the airframe by driving all that HP through a driveshaft and secondary transmission. The CH-47 has five transmissions. Two engine transmissions bolted to each engine then a drive shaft from each connect to the combining gearbox. From there drive shafts once more interconnect from the C-Box (combining gearbox) forward to the forward transmission and then aft towards the aft transmission. The aft transmission also drives two hydraulic pumps and two generators. The forward rotor head is also titled 3.5 degrees (if memory serves me well). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How do they keep the front and rear rotors from striking each other? During some of those maneuvers, the front rotor was tilted so far forward that the rear portion was ABOVE the front part of the rear rotor! They inter-mesh. Think eggbeater. They are directly coupled via the driveshaft (unless a droop stop fails and the rotors cut into the fuselage and sever it, anyway). That would be the only way that makes sense. So, the two engines in the rear drive both rotors. That would lead one to believe one of two things: 1. The aircraft is underpowered, or 2. The aircraft is well powered but beats the hell out of the airframe by driving all that HP through a driveshaft and secondary transmission. It's more #2 (they have more than enough power, especially newer variants). They don't beat the airframe up too badly because of the contra-rotating inter-meshing rotor system. All the torque is "seen" by the airframe in the same direction all the time, so it can be mitigated to some extent by the design. It can encounter problems with ground resonance, most three bladed (or multiples thereof) helicopters are subject to them.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzJbahmaH2o
Seen that video before (there's one from another view as well, if I'm not mistaken). Ground resonance is no joke, but that video really drives the point home! I'd be filling my drawers for sure if I was in a bird and that happened! |
|
Quoted: How did you take that top picture? Were you at a hover?  OGE hover even. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
How did you take that top picture? Were you at a hover? OGE hover even.
It's really neat when removing blades and actuator blocks are not installed. That poor anti-collision light doesn't stand a chance. |