Comments on: POGO Flags Chinook Brownout

By: gruntdoc91

gruntdoc91 — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 16:32:41 +0000

we dont either, look at our budget..we spend more for welfare and medicare/medicaid and social security than we do our military.we get less, trust me.we also spend more on us aid and finance 75% of all UN operations.p.s. chinooks rule no matter whos flyin!

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 10:16:31 +0000

I love this trash talk from Kevin on the "European Allies" using "whimpy helicopters". That's funny, I thought the RAF operated the second biggest Chinook fleet in the world; so are you either ignorant that most of your "European Allies" are flying your helicopters, or you think that the US helicopters are whimpy too? What do you expect from nations many of which are about a hundred time smaller than the US mainland? We don't all dedicate our national resources to warfare first.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:32:07 +0000

It’s always possible they could put different blades on the chinook to improve the brownout condition. Since the CSAR mission doesn’t require the ability to lift as much they could use a different airfoil shape.

By: Vstress

Vstress — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:10:27 +0000

Rotor downwash aerodynamics is a difficult subject and is not dependant only on mass/acceleration of the aircraft. The fact that the helicopter blade is designed as a compromise between hovering and going fast also plays a large role.
The only helicopter that seems to do well with this is the Merlin, which seems to create a distant “brownout” cloud, so the pilot can still see the ground.
Anyways, I doubt the findings of this report.
To be able to state that CSAR-X choppers are more susceptible they would have to make sure all helicopters operate in the same environment.
CSAR helicopters always operate in harsher environments and will often have to land in unknown areas and where hostile forces will also be present — meaning that you are also coming in faster.

By: Marcase

Marcase — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:14:18 +0000

Kevin, this Dutch “European Ally” does fly the Chinook in Afghanistan (and we did in Iraq) together with our own Apache-Deltas and (French-made) Cougars.
We lost one Chinook due to brown-out in Afghanistan, and using small, medium or huge helos doesn’t really make a difference: even a small brown-out can be dangerous.
Question is which helo is the best insertion/extraction a/c, and counter the brown-out (or white-out during winter ops, equally hazardous) with good training and even better crew coordination — better a good crew chief than a supa dupa (expensive) helo.

By: justbill

justbill — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 11:36:06 +0000

+1 to Kevin’s comments

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 02:42:21 +0000

We could do what our "European Allies" do and only use little helicopters. Odd how our "European Allies" are functionally dependent of US CH-47s in Afghanistan because of that darn OGE hover ceiling on little helicopters. But hey look at the bright side of abandoning injured soldiers or troops that run out of ammo because your wimpy helicopters can't fly the mission: You'll have fewer damaged helicopters. And who would say that isn't worth it?

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:07:42 +0000

Cranky, I was originally thinking the same thing, but I figure that it’s a function of aircraft mass, rotor diameter, and lift profile over the length of the rotor.
Larger rotors should mean a lower velocity down-wash.
–Jeff

By: David

David — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:27:11 +0000

Cranky,
Less mass and less acceleration would mean less force (which means less particles are provided with sufficient force to become airborne.

By: SC

SC — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:33:36 +0000

Interesting work. Now I’m not an advocate or dissenter of the chinook but a few questions come to mind; 1) what are the mission profiles flown by other aircraft? they may not be in environments or conditions where brownouts could occur. 2) are there any TTPs that would cause more brownouts on chinooks than others? could be a time for TTP improvement vice an indictment of the a/c. 3) do other a/c have equipment that helps avoid brownout mishaps that chinook doesn’t? 4) how often are missions executed when brownout is a potential condition?
I’m sure other folks will have some more, and the answers to those questions very well could further argue against the selection of the chinook and in favor of the 92 or 101. But let’s not be hasty and pick one stat/condition to make the case that any a/c is the right or wrong one. There are always pros/cons to any a/c and the strengths/weaknesses of those can be just as diverse as the persectives of the operators that use them.