Parabat Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Time to buy a few Skyvans, perchance? http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/manufacture/wamore/wamore5.html Hahaha! It would be EVEN funnier if the RAF didn't rely quite as heavily on Skyvan to get jumps courses through... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 From reading the recent Flight International article it would appear that one of the problems is that quite a lot of the Army's current equipment will not fit into a Hercules. Hence we need something bigger. Now we can argue until the cows come home about whether it should be the C-17 or the Atlas, but the situation is that we have some of each. So if one fleet is grounded for some reason we aren't totally screwed, and I suspect that the Atlas will be able to do some things that a C-17 can't. And in any case, are we ever likely to use a C-17 for anything other than strategic ops? Yes, I know it can get into short strips and do tactical stuff, but I do not see any scenario where it will be used as such. Having said all that, I too would argue for a retention of some C-130s for special forces use and for tasks where a smaller aircraft is needed. All of our helicopters and transports are just getting bigger and bigger, to the extent where we seem to be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut for some tasks, and to retain some Hercules would keep more flexibility in the system. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 They really bought too few C-17s to be a viable tactical support aircraft anyway - deffo a strategic asset in such small numbers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flankerman Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 And in any case, are we ever likely to use a C-17 for anything other than strategic ops? Yes, I know it can get into short strips and do tactical stuff, but I do not see any scenario where it will be used as such. Have we actually purchased the C-17's now ??? IIRC, when we were leasing them from Boeing (and getting screwed into the bargain) - we were not ALLOWED to use them for the tactical stuff in case they got dirty. It was all part of the leasing deal that they couldn't be put in harms way - or am I talking out of my exit ramp as usual??? Ken 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parabat Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Have we actually purchased the C-17's now ??? IIRC, when we were leasing them from Boeing (and getting screwed into the bargain) - we were not ALLOWED to use them for the tactical stuff in case they got dirty. It was all part of the leasing deal that they couldn't be put in harms way - or am I talking out of my exit ramp as usual??? Ken As far as I am aware, we are leasing 5 x C-17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 (edited) We leased four C-17s from Boeing, all of which entered service in 2001, for a period of seven years but the entire RAF fleet of eight (ZZ171-ZZ178) is now owned in their entirety by the UK. The later aircraft were all directly purchased from Boeing (two separately in 2007 and one each in 2010 and 2011). The leased aircraft were purchased outright at the same time as we bought number five. Another two or three would be very welcome. And yes, we didn't do ourselves very well on the lease terms, but I guess there's nothing new there. At least now we can do what we like with them. Edited May 7, 2015 by T7 Models Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parabat Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 We leased four C-17s from Boeing, all of which entered service in 2001, for a period of seven years but the entire RAF fleet of eight (ZZ171-ZZ178) is now owned in their entirety by the UK. The later aircraft were all directly purchased from Boeing (two separately in 2007 and one each in 2010 and 2011). The leased aircraft were purchased outright at the same time as we bought number five. Another two or three would be very welcome. And yes, we didn't do ourselves very well on the lease terms, but I guess there's nothing new there. At least now we can do what we like with them. Good to know this, great update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 As of last month Boeing had 5 left unsold http://blog.forecastinternational.com/wordpress/c-17-white-tails-down-to-five/ However I assume the RAF will be told to carry on with what they have and those will end up elsewhere. Trevor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 As of last month Boeing had 5 left unsold http://blog.forecastinternational.com/wordpress/c-17-white-tails-down-to-five/ However I assume the RAF will be told to carry on with what they have and those will end up elsewhere. Trevor quick can we get the other 5 ... i wonder if the C17 could have been stretched like the hercules ?.. thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMK Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Have we actually purchased the C-17's now ??? IIRC, when we were leasing them from Boeing (and ALLOWING YOURSELVES TO BE screwed into the bargain) - we were not ALLOWED to use them for the tactical stuff in case they got dirty. Fixed it for you, Ken No one compelled the MoD to agree to the lease conditions. I'm sure that the lease conditions were more concerned with minimising expensive trials activities and reducing the likelihood of damage to the airframe, rather than getting them 'dirty'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latinbear Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 If I recall correctly the contract terms on a number of Chinooks weren't too clever either owing to the MoD failing to write the contract properly. Something like £253m spent on helicopters that Boscombe Down said weren't suitable for service. I should have added that of course Boeing was on the other side of that deal too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyot Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 I'm glad I didn't know that when I carried out the Sim stick Para Wedge trials on the Mk4. The big problem with the J and the Atlas is the drop speed has increased which lengthens the DZ needed. For mass airborne drops theses days you're better off with the troops in Chinooks and the Heavy kit coming by fixed wing. Although whilst watching one drop the 7km spread between the wedge load and the last para out did make me think that the Assault glider could make a come back. I know exactly what you mean,....back in the 80`s we did trials on behalf of Boscombe Down to jump sim 45 with wedge at higher speed and lower altitude from the Herk C.3P using the old PX-4 to see if it would allow the whole LPBG to be dropped at lower altitude to keep the Herks below radar,....the higher speed was supposed to help the chute open faster but it ended up popping some panels and it was a horrendous jump into a brutal slipstream! We were strung out for miles despite getting out extremely quickly, almost 2em Rep style!! Soon afterwards the Parachute store at Hullavingdon went up in flames and the MoD bought the LLP! With the older Herks the lads jumping from the side para doors ended up swapping places under the tail during a jump due to the prop slipstream, so if you jumped from the port door you`d end up on the starboard side when your chute opened and vice versa,...which was why the PJI`s tried their best to stagger the sticks,....otherwise you could go through somebody elses rigging lines and I`ve seen it happen loads of times,.....really dodgy. With this in mind what is so dangerous about the C-130J & Airbus slipstream which prevents both para doors being used at the same time? Surely it is imperative for both doors to be used in order to keep the DZ as short as possible? Cheers Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Pardon my ignorance, but instead of jumping out of side doors, why not all jump out off the ramp one line either side? Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parabat Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Pardon my ignorance, but instead of jumping out of side doors, why not all jump out off the ramp one line either side? Trevor There just isn't sufficient lateral separation, and the airflow would tend to 'centre' you if you jumped even from the extreme edge of the ramp. The C-17, C-141 and some Hercs have prop wash doors or fenders in front of the rear stbd and port doors, which helps with exits. The Russians use a parachut which allows them to exit from front stbd and port doors simultaneously to their BMD-3's being airdropped from the rear ramp. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parabat Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 This is a good video of Russian paras conducting a jump. Points to note; 1.The camera is mounted on the Il-76 front door, which opens outwards (forwards, like a car door) to act as a wind break for the jumpers.(A C-130/C-160 door slides up and internally). 2.Their staticline parachute has a drogue chute which allows the jumper to be in clear airspace and then that deploys the main chute. This stabilises the jumper and prevents and chutes or staticline deployment bags getting sucked into the engines. https://youtu.be/CVOaBdKd1-c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Nice video. Not sure I'd be happy jumping out in front of those engines though....... Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeronut Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Tony if you were on the sim45 para wedge trial so was I, it was my trial! Did you do the Karup jump in the thunderstorm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenol Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Oh dear, bodes well: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32673713 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Why "bodes well"? 4 people died...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenol Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 I don't mean to trivialise it, sorry - it's just not an event you want to happen just as you start receiving a new aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 So, really you meant to say "doesn't bode well" - which, in the context of this particular thread, makes more sense; it is also good that you recognize your comment may be seen to trivialize a rather tragic event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenol Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Ah, sorry, in our local dialect, bodes well means the opposite, as in bad omen. I suppose it's a form of deap-seated sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyot Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 (edited) Tony if you were on the sim45 para wedge trial so was I, it was my trial! Did you do the Karup jump in the thunderstorm? Hiya Aeronut, No I wasn`t on that jump although I did hear some lads talking about a jump in a thunderstorm, didn`t realise it was in Denmark. Having checked my photo album and Log Book we actually did two jumps called `Speed Drop Trial`s' and we jumped onto Corby Park DZ up in Otterburn on 9th & 10th Sept 1988 from XV191,.....so as this was a C.1 it couldn`t have been a sim 45, sorry my mistake but it was a full aircraft load! These were my 19th & 20th jumps and I remember that they were among the heaviest Bergan Loads that I ever jumped with,.....we were given loads of canvas lead ballast weights,......plus I didn`t have a weapons valise to rest on the floor in the aircraft! My 18th jump was at Arnhem (Ginkel Heath-attached to 10 PARA) two days earlier and before that it was Corby Pike again for Ex Roaring Lion which was definitely a sim 45 with wedge,.....happy days,.....well apart from the lad we had to extract from a cattle grid that is, it totally ruined his day,...and legs! Cheers Tony Edited May 10, 2015 by tonyot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeronut Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Tony, That info's interesting as my log book shows a Sim 27 para wedge on Otterburn on the 19 September and a Sim 32 para wedge on the 20th. The jump onto Karup was so wet that some of the paras inflated their lifejackets as they thought they were going to land in lakes - they were large puddles. I'll have a look and see if I any of the VHS tapes I rescued show any of the drops. Unfortunately the original 16mm film from the aircraft fixed view cameras has been destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyot Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Tony, That info's interesting as my log book shows a Sim 27 para wedge on Otterburn on the 19 September and a Sim 32 para wedge on the 20th. The jump onto Karup was so wet that some of the paras inflated their lifejackets as they thought they were going to land in lakes - they were large puddles. I'll have a look and see if I any of the VHS tapes I rescued show any of the drops. Unfortunately the original 16mm film from the aircraft fixed view cameras has been destroyed. Hiya Aeronut, You are right,......the fact that I jumped at Arnhem before the Speed Drop Trials means they must have been after 17th Sept and I`ve looked again (now that I`ve woken up and the missus has stopped talking to me about wallpaper while I`m typing!) and the Corby Pike jumps were on the 19th & 20th Sept,...I don`t know where 9th & 10th came from? So they were Sim 27 and 32 were they,.....hard to remember after all of this time I just remember they were treated like operational jumps with a Wedge etc.I think that both were 23 PFA only although 9 Sqn RE might have been involved too? I didn`t buy my log book until 1991 when I was posted back to Brize (they didn`t have any when I got my wings in Feb 1988!) so it was a case of tranx my very sporadic paper records,....so there were quite a few gaps and wrong info done from memory. Were you one of the Boscombe Staff, aircrew, PJI etc? I`d love to see any records from those jumps and what was the official view of them,.....I know that we didn`t like them and lots of blokes ended up with bad twists, but we would have still done it for a real operation. Cheers Tony 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now