• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Helicopter/Cyclone discussion (split from HMCS Fredricton thread)

Baz

Sr. Member
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
NavyShooter said:
FRE is going to head back to sea in a few days.  I would imagine that the RCAF and MH community are going to be starting to think about how to get another helo over to that part of the world.  The ship is far less capable without an embarked helo.  I would imagine thought has been given to this already.

It's late in the deployment, and you would have to C-17 it over.

And 12 Wing isn't particularly fat on aircrew.

But maybe.

*Sarcasm on*  The ship never seems to think this when your their *Sarcasm off*
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,284
Points
910
Baz said:
It's late in the deployment, and you would have to C-17 it over.

And 12 Wing isn't particularly fat on aircrew.

But maybe.

*Sarcasm on*  The ship never seems to think this when your their *Sarcasm off*

We do not yet have an approved method of air transporting a Cyclone by C17. It is still on the “to do list”.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
519
Points
940
SeaKingTacco said:
We do not yet have an approved method of air transporting a Cyclone by C17. It is still on the “to do list”.

Life sometimes has a way of moving things on the to do list, to the do now list,or maybe that's just what having a wife does. However I am not going to speculate on the RCN/RCAF next move as I have zero experience on those matters.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
1,720
Points
1,160
C-17 can airlift CH-147F Chinooks and CH-149 Cormorants, both larger than the CH-148 Cyclone, so I’d think it may become a ‘prioritized effort’, as MilEME09 notes above.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,284
Points
910
Good2Golf said:
C-17 can airlift CH-147F Chinooks and CH-149 Cormorants, both larger than the CH-148 Cyclone, so I’d think it may become a ‘prioritized effort’, as MilEME09 notes above.

I agree, it is not rocket surgery, but it does take effort to get a Cyclone to Trenton; do the load trials; document it; get Sikorsky engineering to sign off on the procedure; publish it all and fabricate/procure any specialized handling equipment. There is a huge laundry list of thing that all need doing- this is just one item.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,680
Points
890
SeaKingTacco said:
I agree, it is not rocket surgery, but it does take effort to get a Cyclone to Trenton; do the load trials; document it; get Sikorsky engineering to sign off on the procedure; publish it all and fabricate/procure any specialized handling equipment. There is a huge laundry list of thing that all need doing- this is just one item.

Wouldn't it be easier to send a C17 with crew to Halifax?  (Non-pilot, non-ATC, non-aircrew here).
 

Baz

Sr. Member
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
tomahawk6 said:
What about a NATO chopper and aircrew to fill in ?

It's quite easy for a helicopter to cross-deck, that is land and get fuel (and maybe something to eat).

It's harder to operate from the other ship for a couple of days.  You'd need some maintainers and a fly-away kit (a small pack up of spares, tools, etc).

It's actually quite difficult to deploy a det.  The det comes onboard with aircraft specific maintainers, tools,, support equipment; and not to mention procedures.  This pack-up is actually specific to ship type and needs to be stowed specifically.

So probably no.
 

Baz

Sr. Member
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
dapaterson said:
Wouldn't it be easier to send a C17 with crew to Halifax?  (Non-pilot, non-ATC, non-aircrew here).

That's how we normally did it with the Sea King.  Doesn't solve all the other problems SKT listed.

Not to mention knitting some aircrew.  There are other deployments coming up as well.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
2,990
Points
1,060
tomahawk6 said:
What about a NATO chopper and aircrew to fill in ?

If they do, and it's a British crew, you'll never get rid of them after they hit the galley :)
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
30
Points
530
Baz said:
It's quite easy for a helicopter to cross-deck, that is land and get fuel (and maybe something to eat).

It's harder to operate from the other ship for a couple of days.  You'd need some maintainers and a fly-away kit (a small pack up of spares, tools, etc).

It's actually quite difficult to deploy a det.  The det comes onboard with aircraft specific maintainers, tools,, support equipment; and not to mention procedures.  This pack-up is actually specific to ship type and needs to be stowed specifically.

So probably no.

They need to work on that, maybe...
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,680
Points
890
daftandbarmy said:
If they do, and it's a British crew, you'll never get rid of them after they hit the galley :)

Don't forget, Canadian ships are dry at sea now.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
452
Points
880
SeaKingTacco said:
I agree, it is not rocket surgery, but it does take effort to get a Cyclone to Trenton; do the load trials; document it; get Sikorsky engineering to sign off on the procedure; publish it all and fabricate/procure any specialized handling equipment. There is a huge laundry list of thing that all need doing- this is just one item.

Unless things are different with the Cyclone, the WSM can authorize such activity.  It took 1 day to get the load trial done for the Hornet.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,284
Points
910
SupersonicMax said:
Unless things are different with the Cyclone, the WSM can authorize such activity.  It took 1 day to get the load trial done for the Hornet.

Perhaps leveraged heavily from USN/USAF procedures? We are the only operator of the Cyclone. There is nobody else to leverage technique off of.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
452
Points
880
SeaKingTacco said:
Perhaps leveraged heavily from USN/USAF procedures? We are the only operator of the Cyclone. There is nobody else to leverage technique off of.

Not that I know of.  We used standard CFTOs procedures to remove and crate wings, reduce pressure in the oleos and then found a way to pull the aircraft into the C-17.  When there is a will there is a way.
 

Zoomie

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
41
Points
530
Cormorant has been put into the back of a C-17 at least once - it flew down to South America.

Contacts at IMP divulge that the capability to do it again has expired and substantial effort would be required to make it happen.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
497
Points
860
Not to sound cheeky, but how did the capability expire?

We still have CH-148's in the inventory.  We still have C-17's. 

??
 

Baz

Sr. Member
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
CloudCover said:
They need to work on that, maybe...

Possibly... but it's worked fine for decades.  A helairdet is not an independent entity, it's meant to work with a certain class of ship, which is how most if not all other countries do it as well.

When we had tankers and 280s the dets were different as well.  Plus high readiness and low readiness dets (PUKs) are different.

I'm not convinced that spending the effort to make them more flexible wrt ship they can deploy to is woth it, esp when there is so much other important work to be done.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
191
Points
710
CBH99 said:
Not to sound cheeky, but how did the capability expire?

We still have CH-148's in the inventory.  We still have C-17's. 

??

Do you mean CH-149s?  (149 = Cormorant, 148 = Cyclone)
 
Top