Author Topic: CH47 Chinook  (Read 250801 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Crimmsy

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 7,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 68
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #25 on: February 23, 2007, 14:23:20 »
What we call it won't necessarily have anything to do with what the manufacturer calls it.

Offline volition

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • -50
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 92
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #26 on: February 23, 2007, 14:31:08 »
Sounds all nice!! But what is going to escort them?? The states have Apaches, what we will put c6`s on it! lol ???
You threat me right, I'll threat you better.
You threat me bad, I'll threat you worse!

Offline Inch

  • Signal Charlie Goodtimes
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,229
  • CH124 Driver
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2007, 15:36:49 »
Its actually the CH147 "F" model not the A, that we are planning to acquire.  It is far more capable, way more bells and whistles and almost double the range with the extra fuel tanks :)

We originally had upgraded "C" models IIRC, we called them CH-147's. So what model we get and what we call it are typically two different things.

Calling our new ones CH-147A's would follow along our traditional naming of aircraft types since these will be our second version of Chinook, thus the "A" or possibly "B" identifier.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 15:40:47 by Inch »
You sir are a moron!
A Mormon? But I'm from Earth.

Offline IN HOC SIGNO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,382
  • Vocatio Ad Servitium
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2007, 15:39:18 »
Is there any news on when we are getting them? When the contract will be signed etc? We seem to have lost track of this purchase with all the hoopla over the C17.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2007, 15:56:42 »
no news.... on either the CC130Js, CH47s or the C27Js
(and that's just part of the Airforce's shopping list)
Chimo!

Offline peaches

  • Member
  • ****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 178
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #30 on: February 23, 2007, 16:01:25 »
Some CAH-164D Apaches would be nice too.... :fifty:
Good GCI is Good
No GCI is Bad
Bad GCI is Treason!!!

Offline Chou

  • Guest
  • *
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #31 on: February 23, 2007, 19:24:11 »
We originally had upgraded "C" models IIRC, we called them CH-147's. So what model we get and what we call it are typically two different things.

Calling our new ones CH-147A's would follow along our traditional naming of aircraft types since these will be our second version of Chinook, thus the "A" or possibly "B" identifier.

Ahh... I did not know that, I was just referring to the manufactures designation.  We recently had a presentation on the Chinooks at the squadron where they clarified a few things regarding model type, specs, due date of "possible" arrival, location.. etc.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 166,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,765
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #32 on: February 26, 2007, 13:05:46 »
All CF aircraft have a C?### designator: C = Canadian, C/E/F/H/T/U = cargo, electronic warfare, fighter, helicopter, trainer, UAV, then a 3-digit numeric designator.

Our "CH147" Chinooks were Boeing CH-47C"+"s -- the first C-model with an AFCS (automated flight control system) in additional to the SAS (stability augmentation system).  Our C+'s were also upgraded with a 28,000lb hook (vice 24,000 hook of the CH-47C), had a 50,000lb MGTOW (vice 46,000lbs of the C) and an ISIS (internal structural integrity system) in the rotor blades.  The engines were also upgraded to the Lycoming T55-L-11C from two earlier engines, the T55-L-7C and the T55-L-11A, and provide ~3,900shp and an emergency 10sec rating of ~4,600shp.

I don't really see anything other than CH147A being used as the designator for the next Canadian model of Chinook brought into service.

G2G
« Last Edit: February 26, 2007, 18:50:51 by Good2Golf »

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #33 on: February 26, 2007, 14:27:54 »
I don't really see anything other than CH147A being used as the designator for the next Canadian model of Chinook brought into service.
If one person here can be confused by the suffix letter, others (especially in other people's armies) will be too. Tell your US buddy that you fly CH147As and he'd likely respond, sympathetically, with "I thought that all of those got upgraded/sold/retired/scrapped long ago". Perhaps CH147F would make more sense internationally.

Offline Ditch

  • Established 1998
  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 26,362
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,341
  • I routinely step in it, but like conflict...
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #34 on: February 26, 2007, 14:38:18 »
Perhaps CH147F would make more sense internationally.

I concur - albeit we don't differentiate our Hercules aircraft with an "E" or "H".  If we get Spartans, will we just call a CC-277 or CC-27J ?  CH-147 works for the basic description, adding that "A" might just mess with too many minds in the end.
Per Ardua Ad Astra

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 166,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,765
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #35 on: February 26, 2007, 14:48:55 »
Folks seem to know that a CF188 is a Hornet, a CC130 is a Herc...they'll figure out a CH147(insert letter here) is a Chinook, methinks.

G2G

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #36 on: February 26, 2007, 15:50:07 »
True, we don't officially tack on an E or H to our Herc designation, but we do use those letters the same as everybody else. We don't call our Es "CC130As" and our Hs "CC130Bs".

Although people could understand that a CH147 is a Chinook, calling what everybody else refers to as an "F" an "A" doesn't promote clarity.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #37 on: February 26, 2007, 15:58:25 »
in that case, call em CH147C1s or C2s?
It worked ok for the Leos 8)
Chimo!

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 166,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,765
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #38 on: February 26, 2007, 16:12:38 »
in that case, call em CH147C1s or C2s?
It worked ok for the Leos 8)

CH147C2...sure, I'm good with that!  ;)

LM, we do have CH124A's and CH124B's however...

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #39 on: February 26, 2007, 16:55:51 »
Technicalities..... we can figure this out, we can figure out anything
Chimo!

Offline Inch

  • Signal Charlie Goodtimes
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,229
  • CH124 Driver
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #40 on: February 26, 2007, 18:41:29 »
CH147C2...sure, I'm good with that!  ;)

LM, we do have CH124A's and CH124B's however...

Don't forget the temporary CH124U (a stripped out B) and the CH124W (Waterbird config).

And if you thought that wasn't confusing enough, I think they're now differentiated by CH124B-1 and CH124B-2, either force generation config or SCF config. I can't recall all the specifics, but come summer time and waterbird season, there could be up to 4 different configs for Sea Kings. At least the cockpits are pretty much the same.   ;D

*edit*
Almost forgot, our new H-92's are going to be CH148's, not CH192's. People will figure it out.
You sir are a moron!
A Mormon? But I'm from Earth.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #41 on: February 26, 2007, 18:47:11 »
yeah.... over the next 50 years ;)
Chimo!

Offline Inch

  • Signal Charlie Goodtimes
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,229
  • CH124 Driver
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #42 on: February 26, 2007, 18:55:48 »
Uh, 44!

How would you like it if I called you 50 when you were only 44? The Sea Kings are crying because of your remark, sleep well tonight you big jerk!  ;D
You sir are a moron!
A Mormon? But I'm from Earth.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #43 on: February 26, 2007, 21:02:42 »
Doh!

Sorry sea thing
Chimo!

Offline Rescue Randy

  • New Member
  • **
  • 3,130
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 48
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #44 on: February 26, 2007, 21:14:34 »
Some bad news at the link, hope it doesn't impact DND too much....

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/02/AFcsarx070226/

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #45 on: February 26, 2007, 21:16:43 »
Some bad news at the link, hope it doesn't impact DND too much....

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/02/AFcsarx070226/

Since we are not buying the HH-47 it should have no impact on us.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #46 on: February 26, 2007, 21:24:08 »
I would presume tnat the US101 is a close cousin to the EH101
Sikorski S92 - Check
HH47...............

Somehow.... this sounds like a familiar story.... just on a larger scale.
Chimo!

Offline PMars

  • Guest
  • *
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #47 on: March 09, 2007, 16:57:02 »
Some bad news at the link, hope it doesn't impact DND too much....

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/02/AFcsarx070226/
This is in reference to GAO upturning the selection of the HH47 for CSAR.

It actially works in our favour. At the rate they were going to get the contract finally signed, we would have been at the tail end of a big USAF order. Maybe we can work it so we get in ahead of USAF now.

Offline chinook003

  • Guest
  • *
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #48 on: July 29, 2008, 22:36:40 »
All of our CH147's where C models except 009 which was actually a D model  modified back to C model so that it would match the rest of the fleet. 009 replaced the first Chinook which we lost in the US when it crashed after takeoff. A bad omen from the start.

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,204
Re: CH47 Chinook
« Reply #49 on: August 21, 2008, 00:09:36 »
Has the number of F models been cut down? According to this article, there will only be 6 D models and 6 F models acquired:  http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/community/mapleleaf/article_e.asp?id=4610

Under the plan, Canada will:

Lease six commercial helicopters for one year to address immediate needs in Afghanistan;
Purchase six used Chinook D model helicopters to address immediate requirements—already in-theatre—from the US government for use starting in February 2009;
Purchase six F-model Chinooks to address long- term requirements (expected to be delivered by late 2011/2012)
Procure a small Scan Eagle UAV for use over the next nine months; and
Lease a larger Heron UAV tactical system that will be delivered by early 2009.


I think there is a mistake in the article.

You're right. I Never  Met A Motherfucker Quite Like You, or someone as smart as you.  Never ever will, either.