• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

5 downed helicopters since Thursday...wtf?

B

beer

Lifer
On the first night of the war, there were two 'hard landings.' One was able to take off, the other had to be destroyed by friendly fire.

Then we lost 16 marines in a downed chopper earlier today.

Now, two Sea Kings collided, killing 6 brits and one US Navy officer....

I knew helicopters had problems, but this is terrible!!!
 
It isn't just the sand... The two today just crashed into each other while flying in formation...

Helicopters in combat fly low, fast, and close together, low margins for error...

: ) Hopper
 
they were attempting to avoid canadian snipers hovering in denial....


the above sarcasm in no way reflects my true thoughts about this tragedy, my prayers and thanks go out to all of the families, friends, and other loved ones of the UK soldiers lost in the colision.

Their cause was just and brings upon them even greater honor, for they were willing to sacrifice themselves for the freedom of another.
 
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
It isn't just the sand... The two today just crashed into each other while flying in formation...

Helicopters in combat fly low, fast, and close together, low margins for error...

: ) Hopper
Click to expand...

True, but the "unexplained" ones seem to be due to the sand issue..
 
I was just about to start a similar thread. Those things fall too much! And supposedly they can land even if the main engine cuts out - it would just slowly propel its way down.

We have smart bombs but stupid helicopters.
 
I was just about to start a similar thread. Those things fall too much! And supposedly they can land even if the main engine cuts out - it would just slowly propel its way down.
Click to expand...

They need to be a certain height for that to work... and even so, it's not going to be a soft landing.

We have smart bombs but stupid helicopters.
Click to expand...

These aren't your little traffic helicopters they're flying. They're heavily plated and carrying soldiers with full equipment, and flying low and fast. I wouldn't disparage them unless you know what you're talking about.
 
Let's not forget the fact that all heavy transport helicopters (CH-46, CH-47, and CH-53) are based on platforms that are at least 40 years old, which might have something to do with it.
 
It always amazes me, we have high tech weapons, and low tech choppers. WTF!!

Shouldn't we be workin on somethin that is post 1960 to fly troops in???


This is a helicopter!!
 
hmmm... the army still has AH-1s... wtf? i know the marines have a heavily modified version, which is weird to begin with, but the army?
 
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
It isn't just the sand... The two today just crashed into each other while flying in formation... Helicopters in combat fly low, fast, and close together, low margins for error... : ) Hopper
Click to expand...


BINGO!
 
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Grasshopper, why don't they put more space between the helicopters in formation?
Click to expand...
They can, and do... but if you've got a squadren of 12 helicopters, you need to keep them close together.

Also, weather, and fatague, etc... play a role

Plus, there are thousands of airplanes and helicopters flying around in a small chunk of airspace, they need to avoid hitting everyone else.

Accidents happen in peace time too...

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: VBboy
I was just about to start a similar thread. Those things fall too much! And supposedly they can land even if the main engine cuts out - it would just slowly propel its way down.

We have smart bombs but stupid helicopters.
Click to expand...
Hey, is someone insulting helicopters???

*pulls can 'o whoopass out of Magic Bag*

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: Moralpanic
I was just about to start a similar thread. Those things fall too much! And supposedly they can land even if the main engine cuts out - it would just slowly propel its way down.
Click to expand...
They need to be a certain height for that to work... and even so, it's not going to be a soft landing.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's true... In most helicopters, you want to have 350 to 500 feet above the ground to try an autorotation.

You have something called the H/V curve, and you want to avoid it.

These aren't your little traffic helicopters they're flying. They're heavily plated and carrying soldiers with full equipment, and flying low and fast. I wouldn't disparage them unless you know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
Of course, in a military siutation, being shot at is a far more seriuos concern than losing the engine...

So into the H/V curve you go!

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: NorthRiver
It always amazes me, we have high tech weapons, and low tech choppers. WTF!!

Shouldn't we be workin on somethin that is post 1960 to fly troops in???

This is a helicopter!!
Click to expand...
Helicopters are expensive... 😀

The old ones work, replacing them = $$$

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
Originally posted by: VBboy
I was just about to start a similar thread. Those things fall too much! And supposedly they can land even if the main engine cuts out - it would just slowly propel its way down.

We have smart bombs but stupid helicopters.
Click to expand...
Hey, is someone insulting helicopters???

*pulls can 'o whoopass out of Magic Bag*

: ) Hopper
Click to expand...

Ok, ok... Helicopter PILOTS are stupid! 😛

And how is replacing a helicopter more expensive than researching new planes, tanks, carriers, orbital defense satellites, etc?
 
The British officer incharge of the mission was interviewed on CBC. He said that the helicopters were flying in OPPOSITE directions, one was on course home, while the other was going back in. He also said that the weather conditions were "relatively good".
 
Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Ok, ok... Helicopter PILOTS are stupid! 😛
Click to expand...
See, now that's better! All you had...

WAIT A MINUTE!!!!

*rereads your post again*

Hey! Now just a minute there... 😀

And how is replacing a helicopter more expensive than researching new planes, tanks, carriers, orbital defense satellites, etc?
Click to expand...
Bottom of the food chain... by the time they get around to the helicopters, the money is spent.

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: Phuz
The British officer incharge of the mission was interviewed on CBC. He said that the helicopters were flying in OPPOSITE directions, one was on course home, while the other was going back in. He also said that the weather conditions were "relatively good".
Click to expand...
Sometimes your number is up, it happens... no one likes it, but flying is less safe than not flying, so sooner or later this happens...

RIP

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
Originally posted by: Phuz
The British officer incharge of the mission was interviewed on CBC. He said that the helicopters were flying in OPPOSITE directions, one was on course home, while the other was going back in. He also said that the weather conditions were "relatively good".
Click to expand...
Sometimes your number is up, it happens... no one likes it, but flying is less safe than not flying, so sooner or later this happens...

RIP

: ) Hopper
Click to expand...

Are those Sea Kings in ANY way related to the Canadian, flying coffins?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top