- Reaction score
- 875
- Points
- 1,010
There's nothing classified in the simulation, so it doesn't matter what you enter... so no. Plus, my brain is too old; I don't remember it!Did you keep the original ASN-123 log in code?
CH-124 Sea King Historical Thread
- Thread starter Baz
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 19,410
- Points
- 1,010
Neither do I. But I will bet that if I sat in front of an ASN-123, closed my eyes and just let my hands move, they would punch in the correct code from muscle memory…
- Reaction score
- 25,752
- Points
- 1,360
‘123456’?
- Reaction score
- 19,410
- Points
- 1,010
Nope…
- Reaction score
- 32,964
- Points
- 1,090
That's the combination for my luggage!
- Reaction score
- 875
- Points
- 1,010
I was wondering what the ASN-150 (a leter version of the ASN-123 which was installed in the CH-124 from early 90's to early 2010's) looked like:
My inital sim posted here isn't driving the TacPlot (yet, I'm going to have it an option in the 123 sim).
I had the Aircraft Operating Instruction for the SH-60F which had it (the 60B used Lamps Mk-III instead), but there wasn't much detail. I got them for the HH-60J (US Coast Guard) and SH-2G Sea Sprite (USN and others). The SH-2G version has all the menus.
Although the basic functionality is the same as the 123, it has some interesting capabilities:
Oh well, hindsight is 20/20...
My inital sim posted here isn't driving the TacPlot (yet, I'm going to have it an option in the 123 sim).
I had the Aircraft Operating Instruction for the SH-60F which had it (the 60B used Lamps Mk-III instead), but there wasn't much detail. I got them for the HH-60J (US Coast Guard) and SH-2G Sea Sprite (USN and others). The SH-2G version has all the menus.
Although the basic functionality is the same as the 123, it has some interesting capabilities:
- can have more than one computer (in the 60F it is used for redundancy)
- each computer can drive two screens
- better user input (I have a video of how much simpler it is than the 123 menus, but can't post it here)
- the screens can also do "normal" video instead of the TACPLOT (the SH-2G uses that for FLIR, radar, and a UYS-503 sonobuoy processor, which is the same processor as on the CH-124B, the 60F for FLIR and Hellfire)
Oh well, hindsight is 20/20...
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 875
- Points
- 1,010
Speaking of independant ops on the Cyclone thread...
I've been trying to run to ground what happened to move from carrier controlled ops to "independant" ops in the Sea King around 1970... it's not entirely clear. Three things converged:
In any case, we ended up putting the 501 in the back with a nav, which opened the door to independant ops. This was unlike in the Tracker, where it was operated by the pilots up front. I would like to think that the community knew doing this while dipping wasn't such a great idea, but at least one crash around that time indicates otherwise. Or maybe that crash made them learn, quickly?
In any case, the 501 went in back, unlike the original requirement, which matched what the USN wanted, a robust tactical computer in front. The USN didn't really get that until the introduction of the ASN-123 in the '70s.
However, even though we had exchange people with the RN, they never seemed to consider the evolving RN Sea King HAS TANS (Tactical Air Navigation System), which was built to support an observer doing "battle management."
So we ended up using USN equipment that was meant for pilots to do what the RN was also doing with a more appropriate fit. Which meant far too much of the TACCO's capacity was eaten up by operating equipment which didn't properly support his supposed core role.
But, as always, hindsight is 20/20.
I've been trying to run to ground what happened to move from carrier controlled ops to "independant" ops in the Sea King around 1970... it's not entirely clear. Three things converged:
- the loss of Bonnie, and her dedicated control capbilities
- the "availability" of RCAF navs
- the availability of the ASN-501
In any case, we ended up putting the 501 in the back with a nav, which opened the door to independant ops. This was unlike in the Tracker, where it was operated by the pilots up front. I would like to think that the community knew doing this while dipping wasn't such a great idea, but at least one crash around that time indicates otherwise. Or maybe that crash made them learn, quickly?
In any case, the 501 went in back, unlike the original requirement, which matched what the USN wanted, a robust tactical computer in front. The USN didn't really get that until the introduction of the ASN-123 in the '70s.
However, even though we had exchange people with the RN, they never seemed to consider the evolving RN Sea King HAS TANS (Tactical Air Navigation System), which was built to support an observer doing "battle management."
So we ended up using USN equipment that was meant for pilots to do what the RN was also doing with a more appropriate fit. Which meant far too much of the TACCO's capacity was eaten up by operating equipment which didn't properly support his supposed core role.
But, as always, hindsight is 20/20.
Similar threads
